Fatherland worthy sons. Conversation about what is the son of the fatherland Discourse on work and idleness
Where does homeland begin?
The concept of "patriot" last year celebrated its 300th anniversary. It appeared in 1716, but earlier no one used such a word and did not think in such categories. In Rus', patriotism in our modern sense did not exist. No, of course, the people loved their native land and even sang. True, it is quite difficult to determine what the Russian land of the 13th century, for example, is - the territories that we used to call Russian did not consider themselves as such at all. However, they were in some way united - like the lands of the Christians.
The word "patriot" appeared in Russia in 1716
But it was precisely this unity based on the Christian faith that prevented the emergence of the concept of patriotism. Moscow, which considered itself the successor of Byzantium and Rome, adopted their self-determination as a world kingdom. And in the Gospel of John it says at all: “Jesus answered: My kingdom is not of this world,” that is, a real Christian should have thought about eternal life, and not about a mortal earthly existence. And only many years later, in the 19th century, the motto "For the Faith, the Tsar and the Fatherland" appeared, uniting Orthodoxy and love for one's country in the minds of the Russian people.
For a long time, "patriot" and "son of the fatherland" were synonymous
The concept of patriotism was preceded by love for the fatherland, for what we now call a small homeland. For example, during the time of the Mongol yoke, one specific land, “patrimony”, the heritage of the fathers, was considered the fatherland. Only by the XIV century, the fatherland receives a different interpretation - a larger one, its borders go beyond the boundaries of one land. This was largely facilitated by the rise of the Moscow principality.
Life for the king!
For a long time, patriotism was associated not with love for the country, but with admiration for the ruler. The very word "state", in our usual sense, appeared only by the 16th century. Back in the 15th century, the “state” was understood as the personal power, in particular, of Ivan III. But already in the Sudebnik of 1550, “state” means a certain territory, land. The most striking change in focus from the ruler to the territory manifested itself during the Time of Troubles. The beginning of the 17th century clearly showed that the inhabitants of Russia were ready to fight for the country in which they live, even if there was no tsar-father over them.
Grand Duke of Moscow Ivan III
First patriot
In the 17th century, the concept of the “common good” appeared, which arose on the basis of the combination of the idea of “motherland” and “state”. Alexey Mikhailovich, for example, in his letters talks about goodness for the state. His son, Peter I, can rightly be considered the first patriot in the modern sense of the word. For the first time, the term "patriot" is found in the treatise "Discourse on the Causes of the Svean War", written by an associate of Peter I, Peter Shafirov, in 1716.
The term "patriotism" appeared in the Catherine era
Then the word "patriot" still retained the meaning that came from the Greek - "compatriot". That is why Shafirov uses the combination "true patriot" or, as equivalent to him, "son of the fatherland." He calls the ruler "the father of the fatherland" and considers him a true patriot, that is, a fighter for his homeland. The term "patriot" replaced the expressions already existing in the language - "lover of the fatherland", "well-wisher". True, they did not take root in speech, but the borrowing remained.
Petr Pavlovich Shafirov
At the beginning of the 18th century, the word "patriot" was used only by the nobility, and only a few decades later it entered the lexicon of educated people. By the end of the century, the concept of "patriotism" appeared, which the writers of that time used. For example, in the essay “A Conversation about the Son of the Fatherland”, Radishchev argues whether any person born in the country is worthy of bearing the name of a patriot.
A. N. Radishchev considered the liberation of the peasants and the overthrow of the autocracy, which, in alliance with the church, mercilessly oppressed the people, to be the main political tasks. “Autocracy is the state most repugnant to human nature,” he writes. At the same time, Radishchev developed the idea that the enlightenment of the people, the mental, moral and political education of the younger generation play an important role in the reorganization of the country. These questions draw his attention. He covers them in his main work "Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow", in the philosophical treatise "On Man, on His Mortality and Immortality", in the sociological essay "Experience on Legislation", "Conversation about what is the son of the fatherland" and in a number of others.
In 1790, he wrote and printed in his home printing house his most famous work - the book "Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow." It not only sharply condemns serfdom, but also contains a direct call for the overthrow of the monarchy and the establishment of a republican form of government. After reviewing the book, Catherine II described the author: "A rebel is worse than Pugachev!" Worse, because, in the words of Radishchev himself, Pugachev's speech showed "in its ignorance, the joy of revenge rather than the benefit of shaking bonds," and the author of Journey just ideologically shook the very "bonds", the foundations of autocratic monarchy, the estate system and serfdom.
Radishchev exposed the feudal system of public education: “division into estates” deprives the masses of the people of the opportunity to become familiar with knowledge, and meanwhile “a person, coming into the world, is equal in everything to another”; the ability to know, think, create is inherent in all people, regardless of race and class. The few schools drag out a miserable existence. Cut off from modern life, they "belong to past centuries." Neither at school nor in the family is the main task of education carried out - the formation of the personality of a true son of the fatherland, who passionately loves his people and hates violence, ready for a selfless struggle against social injustice. Everything that exists is various forms of manifestation of matter. Material, "material" and man. Man is not only a part of nature, he is also its highest creation, "the most perfect of creatures, the crown of material compositions, the king of the earth." Being the highest stage in the development of nature, being a “relative” to everything living, man is different from other living beings, even from the most highly organized animals, from monkeys. The main difference between man and other animals, along with a straight gait and developed hands, is his ability to think and speak. Speech contributes to the expansion, development of a person's mental abilities, the establishment of links between thoughts - "the collection of thoughts together." But there is one feature of a person, perhaps the most important: a person is a creature that can live only in the company of other creatures of its own kind: "Man is born for a hostel."
Radishchev opposed the religious-idealistic view of man. Pointed to the relationship between physical and mental development.
The main task of education: the formation of a person with civic consciousness, high moral qualities, who loves his fatherland most of all. He expressed these thoughts in the essay "Conversation about what is the son of the Fatherland." The state is obliged to ensure that the rising generation receives a proper upbringing.
Much attention was given to the process of mastering knowledge, mental development. He insisted that the native language should become the language of science and education. He urged to reckon with the natural characteristics of children, although he said that the main thing in the formation of a person is not his natural data, but the circumstances of life.
He demanded a full-fledged education for children of all classes, which should be not just education, but the political education of a person who is comprehensively prepared for the work of rebuilding society.
Gymnasiums should be of two types:
- 1. classical (humanitarian disciplines, made it possible to enter the university)
- 2. real (oriented to natural and mathematical disciplines).
Radishchev defended the people's right to education. According to natural data, the peasant is sharp-witted, capable of mental development no less than other classes. The right to education can only be achieved through a peasant revolution and the establishment of a new, just system. Then a properly organized upbringing will become the main force that forms a real person. But, Alexander Nikolayevich wrote, "recognizing the power of education, we will not take away the power of nature." As we can see, he addressed the problem of the relationship between the environment, upbringing and the biological factor in human development. The new upbringing, according to Radishchev, should be accessible to every child, regardless of origin, and carried out in their native language. Its main goal is to prepare the "son of the fatherland" , a citizen, a true patriot, a defender of the interests of the people, ready for anything for him. The “son of the fatherland” has all the data for a reasonable and useful life in society: mind, health, strong will, noble character, readiness for useful work. Radishchev is a supporter of real education, which gives knowledge of real life, in contrast to the classical one, in which there is a lot of scholasticism. Education should be based on the native language and history, supplemented with a wide range of natural and other humanitarian knowledge. It required the opening of a large number of higher educational institutions. In the process of learning and on the example of parents, educators, other people from the environment of the child, his moral education should be carried out. Linking morality with the revolutionary idea, he defined the moral features of the "son of the fatherland": patriotism, the desire for freedom, hatred of slavery, humanity, honesty, hard work, willpower, the ability to protect dignity.
Attacking the contemporary system of education and upbringing, Radishchev draws an ideal that has not yet been realized in many respects. He says that the government exists for the people, and not vice versa, that the happiness and wealth of the people are measured by the well-being of the mass of the population, and not the well-being of a few people, etc. (largely reproduced in the 1st volume of "Russian Poetry" by A.S. Vengerov). Pushkin imitated Radishchev's poem "The Heroic Tale of Bova".
Labor, according to Radishchev, acts as the best seasoning in a pupil's lunch, and bliss and laziness are the worst scourges of the human body, they weaken both the body and the strength of the spirit. Mental, moral, physical development with labor education are one. The constant "use of strength" strengthens the body, and with it the "disintegration" of its mental faculties and morality is obtained. A.N. Radishchev is a person of exceptional courage with a developed civic consciousness. Catherine II called him a rebel worse than Pugachev, defining Radishchev a severe punishment for free-thinking and forbidding his writings, which until 1864 belonged to "hidden literature." Perhaps, in some of his statements, he is unnecessarily categorical. In the same noble education there was a lot of instructive. He also overestimated the realities of the peasant revolution in the absence of a strong bourgeoisie. Maybe he idealized the “son of the fatherland” too much. But in the main thing he was right: the people should be able to protect themselves and their right to education. From A.N. Radishchev went to the origins of Russian revolutionary-democratic pedagogy , further developed by Belinsky, Herzen, Chernyshevsky, Dobrolyubov, which existed in Russia in the 19th century.
This is a revolutionary journalistic article (1789), published in the magazine "Conversing Citizen". Arguing about who can be awarded the title of the true son of the Fatherland, Radishchev puts forward the main condition: they can only be "a free being." Hence, he refuses the peasant who is in serfdom in this rank, refuses with great pity. But how angry is his denunciation of the oppressors, those feudal landowners, "tormentors" and "oppressors" who are accustomed to consider themselves sons of the Fatherland. In the article we have a whole series of satirical portraits of evil, insignificant, frivolous landowners. But who is worthy of being a true son of the Fatherland? And Radishchev replies that a true patriot can be a person full of honor, nobility, capable of sacrificing everything for the good of the people, and if necessary, if he knows that "his death will bring strength and glory to the Fatherland, then he is not afraid to sacrifice his life." This is one of the strongest political speeches of Radishchev the revolutionary, demanding freedom for the people.
Ode "Liberty"
For the first time, the theory of the people's revolution receives a journalistic and artistic embodiment in the work written by Radishchev in 1781-1783. ode "Liberty", excerpts from which were included in the "Journey".
The fate of the motherland and the people is the focus of the author, an advanced person who is able to compare historical facts and events with the present and come to general philosophical conclusions about the laws of the emergence of a revolution in Russia, whose people are able to respond with violence to violence. Ode "Liberty" is a work of great poetic and oratorical passion, testifying to the maturity of Radishchev's revolutionary worldview. "Soothsayer of Liberty" proves "that a person is free in everything from birth." Starting with the apotheosis of liberty, which is perceived as “a priceless gift of man”, “the source of all great deeds”, the poet further discusses what hinders this. Unlike the enlighteners of the 18th century. Radishchev, speaking of freedom, has in mind not only natural, but also social equality, which must be achieved through the struggle for the rights of the people. He passionately denounces slavery and despotism, the laws established by the autocratic power, which are "an obstacle to freedom." He exposes the union of tsarist power and the Church, which is dangerous for the people, speaking out against the monarchy as such.
The monarchy should be replaced by a democratic system based on social equality and freedom. In the "realm of freedom" the land will belong to those who cultivate it.
Faith in the future victory of the people's revolution inspires the poet, it is based on the study of the experience of his country (the peasant uprising led by Pugachev), and on examples taken from the English and American revolutions. Historical events, the historical names of the leaders of the revolution of Cromwell, Washington can be instructive for other peoples. Recreating the controversial image of Cromwell, Radishchev gives him credit for the fact that "... You taught in generations and generations how peoples can take revenge on themselves: you executed Charles at the trial.
The ode ends with a description of the “most chosen day”, when the revolution will win and renew the “dear fatherland”. The pathos of the ode is faith in the victory of the people's revolution, although the historically minded Radishchev understands that "there is not yet a year to go." The philosophical, journalistic content of the ode finds appropriate stylistic forms of expression. The traditional genre of the ode is filled with revolutionary pathos, and the use of Slavicisms, which give a solemn sound to the expressed ideas, only emphasizes the unity of artistic form and content. The success of the ode was enormous.
The theme of the revolution in "Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow" by Radishchev. (printed in 1790)
Radishchev began writing Journey in the mid-1980s. There is no calm narrator, immersed in the world of his own feelings and experiences, but there is a person, a citizen, a revolutionary, filled with sympathy for the powerless and indignation for the oppressors. The theme of revolution is heard in many chapters of the Journey. Pictures of the inhuman treatment of the people, the consciousness of social injustice evoke in Radishchev passionate calls for the overthrow of the power of the feudal lords. Since the majority of people in an autocratic state are “likened to draft animals”, humiliated, the constantly offended person, “drawn by a sense of his own safety, is forced to repel the insult” (“Chudovo”).
The rigidity and greed of the "bloodsucker" landowner, whose deeds are described in the chapter "Vyshny Volochok", provokes the wrath of the traveler, who calls on the people to respond to violence with violence.
Everything that the traveler sees on his way: road encounters, observations of the life of different classes, makes him deeply sympathize with the oppressed people and fills him with a sense of irreconcilable hostility to the oppressors, the consciousness of the need for a revolutionary struggle for the liberation of the people, the struggle of the people itself. Revolution arises as the inevitable result of oppression.
An open call for an uprising is also heard in the chapter "Gorodnya", where there is a dramatic story about recruiting, about the illegal sale of people into recruits just because their landowner "needed money for a new carriage."
Radishchev believes that the time will come when new people will come out of the people and freedom will come not from above - "from the great fathers", but from below - "from the very burden of enslavement", but he understands that "the time is not yet ripe." Historicism of thinking suggested to him that the revolution in Russia would take place, but this would take time. Russian reality, the peculiarities of the Russian national character are the key to the inevitability of the revolution.
The experience of the Pugachev uprising convinces Radishchev of the ability of the people to revolt. However, the revolutionary writer understands that the spontaneous nature of the uprising cannot lead to fundamental changes in Russian reality, to the victory of the people. In this regard, the chapter "Khotilov" is complex and controversial, in which Radishchev gives an assessment of the Pugachev uprising and proposes a possible project for future transformations through reforms.
The basis of the Journey is a call for revolution, but Radishchev knew that victory was possible only after decades, and therefore it is quite possible for him to search for a solution to the most painful issue - the liberation of the peasants in other ways, one of which is a project as an attempt to alleviate the lot of the people, at least for the next time.
Not everyone born in the Fatherland is worthy of the majestic name of the son of the Fatherland (patriot). - Under the yoke of slavery, those who are not worthy to adorn themselves with this name. - Hold on, sensitive heart, do not pronounce your judgment on such sayings, as long as you stand at Prague. - Step in and see! - Who does not know that the name of the son of the Fatherland belongs to a person, and not to an animal or cattle, or another dumb animal? It is known that a person is a free being, inasmuch as he is gifted with mind, reason and free will; that his freedom consists in choosing the best, that he knows this best and chooses through reason, comprehends with the help of the mind and always strives for the beautiful, the majestic, the high. - All this he acquires in a single following of natural and revealed laws, otherwise called divine, derived from divine and natural civil, or cenobitic. - But in whom these abilities, these human feelings are stifled, can it be adorned with the majestic name of the son of the Fatherland? - He's not human, but what? he is lower than cattle; for even the cattle follow their own laws, and no departure from them has yet been noticed in it. But here the discussion about those most unfortunate ones whom treachery or violence deprived of this majestic advantage of a person does not apply, who are made such that without coercion and fear they no longer produce any of such feelings, who are likened to draft cattle, do not do above a certain work, from which they cannot be freed; who are likened to a horse condemned to carry a cart for life, and having no hope of freeing themselves from their yoke, receiving equal rewards with a horse and suffering equal blows; not of those who do not see an end to their yoke, except death, where their labors and their torments will end, although it sometimes happens that cruel sorrow, declaring their spirit to reflection, kindles a faint light of their mind and makes them curse their miserable state and seek this end; we are not talking about those who do not feel anything else but their humiliation, who crawl and move in the sleep of death (lethargy), who are like a man only in appearance, in other things are burdened by the weight of their shackles, deprived of all blessings, excluded from the whole heritage of people , oppressed, humiliated, contemptible; which are nothing but dead bodies buried one next to the other; work necessary for a person from fear; nothing but death is desirable for them, and for whom the least desire is ordered, and the most unimportant enterprises are executed; they are only allowed to grow, then die; about whom it is not asked what they have done worthy of mankind? what laudable deeds, traces of their past life, left? what good, what benefit has this great number of hands brought to the State? - Not about these here a word; they are not members of the State, they are not human, when they are nothing but machines driven by the Tormentor, dead corpses, heavy cattle! - A man, a man is needed to bear the name of the son of the Fatherland! - But where is he? where is this one worthy of this majestic name? - Is it not in the arms of bliss and voluptuousness? - Not enveloped in the flames of pride, arrogance, violence? - Is it not buried in bad profit, envy, malevolence, enmity and discord with everyone, even those who feel the same way with him, and strive for the same thing? - or is it not mired in the mire of laziness, gluttony and drunkenness? - Helicopter, flying around from noon (for then he begins his day) the whole city, all the streets, all the houses, for the most senseless empty talk, for the seduction of chastity, for the infection of good manners, for catching simplicity and sincerity, having made his head a flour shop, eyebrows a receptacle of soot, cheeks whitened with boxes and minium, or rather a picturesque palette, the skin of his body with elongated drum skin, looks more like a monster in his attire than a man, and his dissolute life, marked by stench, from the mouth and whole body of his happening, he is smothered by a whole pharmacy of incense sprays - in a word, he is a fashionable person who completely fulfills all the rules of the smart high society of science; - he eats, sleeps, wallows in drunkenness and voluptuousness, despite his exhausted strength; he changes clothes, talks all sorts of nonsense, shouts, runs from place to place, briefly - he is a dandy. - Isn't this the son of the Fatherland? - or the one who majestically raises his gaze to the firmament of heaven, tramples under his feet all who are in front of him, tormenting his neighbors with violence, persecution, oppression, imprisonment, deprivation of title, property, torment, seduction, deceit and murder itself, - in a word, by all means known to him alone, tearing apart those who dare to utter the words: humanity, freedom, peace, honesty, holiness, property, and others like that? - streams of tears, rivers of blood not only do not touch, but delight his soul. - He should not exist who dares to oppose his speeches, opinions, deeds and intentions! Is this the son of the Fatherland? - Or the one who stretches his arms to seize the wealth and possessions of his whole Fatherland, and if possible, the whole world, and who with composure is ready to take away from his most unfortunate compatriots the last crumbs that support their dull and languid life, rob, plunder their motes of property; who delights in joy if an opportunity for a new acquisition opens up to him; let it be paid with rivers of blood of his brethren, let it deprive the last refuge and food of fellow human beings like him, let them die of hunger, cold, heat; let them weep, let them kill their children in despair, let them risk their lives for thousands of deaths; all this will not shake his heart; all this means nothing to him; - he multiplies his estate, and this is enough. - So, does the name of the son of the Fatherland belong to this? - Or is it not the one sitting at the table filled with the works of all four elements, to which several people, taken away from the service of the Fatherland, sacrifice to the delight of taste and belly, so that after satiety he could be rolled into bed, and there he would calmly engage in the consumption of other products, which will he take it into his head until sleep robs him of the strength to move his jaws? So, of course, this one, or any of the above four? (for the fifth addition is only rarely found separately). A mixture of these four is visible everywhere, but the son of the Fatherland is not yet visible, if he is not among these! - The voice of reason, the voice of the laws inscribed in nature and the heart of people, does not agree to call calculated people the sons of the Fatherland! The very ones who truly are such will pronounce judgment (not on themselves, for they do not find themselves so); but on those like themselves, they will be sentenced to exclude such from among the sons of the Fatherland; since there is no person, no matter how vicious and blinded by himself, so that he does not somehow feel the rightness and beauty of things and deeds<...>
There is no person who would not feel sorrow, seeing himself humiliated, reviled, enslaved by violence, deprived of all means and ways to enjoy peace and pleasure, and not finding his consolation anywhere. Doesn't this prove that he loves Honor, without which he is like without a soul. It is not necessary here to explain that this is true honor; for the false, instead of deliverance, subdues all the above, and will never calm the human heart. - Everyone has an innate sense of true honor; but it illuminates the deeds and thoughts of a person as he approaches him, following the lamp of the mind, leading him through the darkness of passions, vices and warnings to her quiet, honor, that is, light. - There is not a single mortal who is so outcast by nature who does not have that spring embedded in the heart of every person, directing him to love Honor. Everyone wants to be respected rather than reproached, everyone strives for his further improvement, celebrity and glory: no matter how hard the caresser of Alexander the Great, Aristotle, tries to prove the opposite to himself, arguing that nature itself has already disposed the mortal race in such a way that one and at the same time a much larger part of them must certainly be in a slave state, and therefore not feel that there is Honor? and the other in the dominant, because not many have noble and majestic feelings. - It is not disputed that a much nobler part of the mortal race is immersed in the gloom of barbarism, atrocities and slavery; but this does not prove in the least that a person is not born with a feeling that directs him to the great and to the improvement of himself, and consequently, to the love of true glory and Honor. The reason for this is either the type of life spent, or the circumstances in which one is forced, or inexperience, or the violence of the enemies of the righteous and lawful exaltation of human nature, exposing it by force and deceit to blindness and slavery, which weakens the human mind and heart, imposing the most severe fetters of contempt and oppression. overwhelming power of the eternal spirit. - Do not justify yourself here, oppressors, villains of mankind, that these terrible bonds are an order that requires submission. Oh, if you had penetrated the chain of all nature, as much as you can, and you can do a lot, then you would feel other thoughts in yourself; would find that love, and not violence, contains only beautiful order and subordination in the world. All nature is subject to it, and where it is, there are no terrible disgrace * * that draw tears of compassion from sensitive hearts, and at which the true Friend of mankind shudders. - What would nature then represent, except for a mixture of discordant (chaos), if it were deprived of this spring? Truly, she would be deprived of the greatest way both to preserve and improve herself. Everywhere and with every person, this ardent love for gain is born. Honor and praise from others. - This comes from the innate human sense of limitation and dependence. This feeling is so strong that it always prompts people to acquire for themselves those abilities and advantages, through which love is earned both from people and from the highest being, evidenced by the pleasure of conscience; and having earned the favor and respect of others, a person becomes trustworthy in the means of preserving and improving himself. - And if this is so, then who doubts that this strong love for Honor and the desire to acquire the pleasure of one's conscience with favor and praise from others is the greatest and most reliable means without which human well-being and perfection cannot exist? - For what means will then be left for a person to overcome those difficulties that are inevitable on the path leading to the achievement of blissful peace, and to refute that faint-hearted feeling, which causes trembling when looking at one's shortcomings? - What is the remedy for getting rid of the fear of falling forever under the most terrible burden of these? if you take away, firstly, a refuge full of sweet hope to the highest being, not like an avenger, but like a source and beginning of all blessings; and then to people like themselves, with whom nature has united us, for the sake of mutual help, and who inwardly bow to the readiness to provide it and, with all the muffled of this inner voice, feel that they should not be those blasphemers who hinder the righteous human striving for perfection. himself, who sowed in man this feeling to seek refuge? - An innate feeling of dependence, clearly showing us this dual means to our salvation and pleasure. - And what, finally, induces him to join these paths? what prompts him to unite with these two human blissful means, and to care to please them? - Truly, nothing more than an innate ardent impulse to acquire for oneself those abilities and beauty, through which one deserves the favor of God and the love of his fellows, the desire to be worthy of their favor and patronage. - Considering human deeds, you will see that this is one of the main springs of all the greatest works in the world! - and this is the beginning of that urge to love honor, which was sown in man at the beginning of his creation! this is the reason for feeling that delight that is usually associated with the heart of a person, how soon God’s favor is poured out on it, which consists in sweet silence and the delight of conscience, and how soon he acquires the love of his kind, which is usually depicted as joy when looking at him, praises, exclamations. - This is the subject to which true people strive and where they find their true pleasure! It has already been proven that a true man and a son of the Fatherland are one and the same; therefore, there will be a sure distinguishing mark of him, if he thus Ambitious.
Let him begin to adorn the majestic name of the son of the Fatherland, the Monarchy. For this he must honor his conscience, love his neighbors; for love alone is acquired; should fulfill his calling as prudence and honesty commands, not caring in the least about retribution, honor, exaltation and glory, which is a companion, or rather, a shadow, always following virtue, illuminated by the non-evening sun of truth; for those who pursue glory and praise, not only do not acquire them for themselves from others, but rather lose them.
The true man is the true executor of all his laws, provided for the bliss; he sacredly obeys them. - Noble and alien to empty holiness and hypocrisy, modesty accompanies all his feelings, words and deeds. With reverence, he submits to everything that order, improvement and general salvation require; for him there is no low state in the service of the Fatherland; serving him, he knows that he contributes to the healthy circulation, so to speak, of the blood of the state body. - He would rather agree to perish and disappear than set an example of indiscretion to others and thereby take away children from the Fatherland, who could be an adornment and support thereof; he fears to contaminate the juices of the prosperity of his fellow citizens; he burns with the most tender love for the integrity and tranquility of his compatriots; nothing so eager to see as mutual love between them; he kindles this beneficent flame in all hearts; is not afraid of the difficulties that he encounters with this noble feat of his; overcomes all obstacles, tirelessly vigilant over the preservation of honesty, gives good advice and instructions, helps the unfortunate, saves from the dangers of delusion and vices, and if he is sure that his death will bring strength and glory to the Fatherland, then he is not afraid to sacrifice his life; if it is needed for the Fatherland, then it preserves it for the full observance of natural and domestic laws; as far as possible, he turns away everything that can stain the purity and weaken the good intentions of them, as if destroying the bliss and perfection of his compatriots. In a word, he well-behaved! Here is another true sign of the son of the Fatherland! The third and, as it seems, the last distinctive sign of the son of the Fatherland, when he noble. Noble is he who made himself famous for his wise and philanthropic qualities and his deeds; who shines in society with reason and virtue and, being inflamed with truly wise piety, all his strength and efforts are directed solely towards this, so that, obeying the laws and guardians thereof, who hold the authorities, both all of himself and everything that he does not have, revere otherwise than as belonging to the Fatherland, use it as a pledge of the good will of his compatriots and his sovereign, who is the father of the people, entrusted to him, sparing nothing for the good of the Fatherland. He is directly noble, whose heart cannot but tremble with tender joy at the single name of the Fatherland, and who does not feel differently at that memory (which is incessant in him) as if it was said about the most precious thing in the world of his honor. He does not sacrifice the good of the Fatherland to prejudices that rush about, as if brilliant, in his eyes; sacrifices everything for its good; its supreme reward consists in virtue, that is, in that inner harmony of all inclinations and desires, which the wise creator pours into an immaculate heart, and which nothing in the world can imitate in its silence and pleasure. For true nobility there are virtuous deeds, revived by true honor, which is not found elsewhere, as in uninterrupted goodness to the human race, but mainly to one's compatriots, repaying everyone according to their dignity and according to the prescribed laws of Nature and Government. Decorated with these only qualities, both in enlightened antiquity, and now, they are honored with true praises. And here is the third distinctive sign of the son of the Fatherland!
But no matter how brilliant, no matter how glorious, or delightful for any well-meaning heart, these qualities of the son of the Fatherland, and although everyone is akin to having them, they cannot but be impure, mixed, dark, confused, without proper education and enlightenment by Science and Knowledge, without which this best human ability conveniently, as it always has been and is, turns into the most harmful impulses and strivings and floods entire states with wickedness, unrest, strife and disorder. For then human concepts are obscure, confused and completely chimerical. - Why, before anyone wishes to have the aforementioned qualities of a true man, it is necessary that he first accustom his spirit to industriousness, diligence, obedience, modesty, intelligent compassion, to the desire to do good to everyone, to the love of the Fatherland, to the desire to imitate great examples in that, also to love for sciences and arts, as far as the title sent in the hostel allows; applied to an exercise in history and philosophy or wisdom; not school, for the sake of word dispute only addressed, but in the true, teaching a person his true duties; and to purify the taste, I would love to look at the paintings of great artists, music, sculpture, architecture or architecture.
Those who consider this reasoning to be that Platonic system of social education, which we will never see events, will be very mistaken, when in our eyes the kind of education exactly like this, and based on these rules, was introduced by God-wise monarchs, and enlightened Europe sees with amazement the successes of it, ascending to intended goal with gigantic steps!
Radishchev A.N. Full coll. op.
M.; L.; 1938. T. I . pp. 213-224.
A.N. Radishchev - writer and publicist, philosopher. Introduced into Russian literature the idea of a revolutionary transformation of society, the enemy of serfdom. Author of the book "Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow." The article “A Conversation about the Son of the Fatherland” was first published in the monthly magazine “The Conversing Citizen” (1789. Part III) anonymously for security reasons.
Composition
according to the article by A. N. Radishchev "A conversation about what is the son of the fatherland"
Does patriotism exist today?
"Two feelings are wonderfully close to us,
In them the heart finds food:
Love for the native ashes,
Love for father's coffins.
Based on them from the ages,
By the will of God himself,
human self,
The pledge of his greatness."
A.S. Pushkin
Having read the article by A. Radishchev “A Conversation about the Son of the Fatherland”, I noticed that reflections on patriotism are relevant to this day. The thinkers and writers of that time skillfully wrote critical articles and took on topics that attracted and will attract readers for a considerable number of centuries.
Before turning to my thoughts and starting to reflect on this essay topic, I would like to talk about Radishchev's article.
He asks the question that torments him: “What is the son of the fatherland?” and considers in his work four types of young people of his time. Among them, unfortunately, he does not notice the slightest resemblance to the patriot of his country, because. these people are only preoccupied with themselves, their well-being and are known as real, whatever they are, egoists. They do not care at all about the fate of the people, the fatherland; they are also not interested in themes of love for the Motherland, kindness and honesty. On these examples, the author ridicules the representatives of his society, and, at the same time, sadness and sadness about young people who are not interested in anything but themselves can be traced in his words; who not only behave like real sons of the fatherland, they even have no idea how, they look like that. They just don't care and it makes them sad. Not only do they not care about the defense of their homeland, they also violate the elementary laws of society, life and morality.
Further, Radishchev still tries to find a representative of patriotism and formulates how he should look and what qualities he should have. His speech initially refers to honor. The writer says that every person is invested from birth love of honor that "everyone wants to be respected rather than reproached, everyone strives for his further improvement, celebrity and glory ...".
After that, he makes a small conclusion that a true man and a son of the fatherland are one and the same, and will be his distinguishing feature, unless of course he ambitious. The most important, Radishchev calls love for neighbors, as well as the fulfillment of all laws: social and divine.
The author believes that for a true son of the fatherland “there is no low state in serving the fatherland. The “son”, in his opinion, should be ready to sacrifice himself, rather than set an example of indiscretion for his compatriots. Hence follows his other quality, this person must be well-behaved. A patriot overcomes any obstacles in his path, he is not afraid of difficulties in such a good cause as the defense of the fatherland.
Finally, he names the last distinguishing mark of a true man: nobility. By this, Radishchev understands the desire for wisdom and for the possession of philanthropic qualities, as well as, of course, good deeds in relation to others.
Gives a small definition of human nobility: “That is, directly noble, whose heart cannot but tremble with tender joy at the single name of the fatherland and who does not feel differently at that memory (which is incessant in him), as if it were said about the most precious thing in the world parts of it."
Talks about true nobility. " True nobility - there are virtuous deeds, revived by true honor, which is not found elsewhere, as in uninterrupted goodness to the human race, but mainly to one's compatriots, repaying everyone according to their dignity and according to the prescribed laws of nature and government.
This is exactly how A.N. sees the son of the fatherland. Radishchev.
Now I would like to express my opinion and tell how in my mind a true son of the fatherland looks like.
I would be lying if I said that I did not agree with the point of view of A.N. Radishchev.
Of course, anyone else would want to stand out and stand out, show their alleged "courage" and argue with such a wise person. However, I do not consider myself smarter than such people, therefore, expressing my point of view, I fully support this author. Since his thoughts are really close to me, is there any point in trying to dispute what is true? Exactly what makes no sense. Therefore, let us begin to comprehend this question: “What is the son of the fatherland?”
After thinking about this question, I realized that it is worth considering the “son of the fatherland” not as a young man who longs to become one, but as a person in general, and no matter what gender, race and age he belongs to.
So what does he look like to me?
This is a Man (yes, with a capital letter), and not just a creature that looks like a man. Having written this, I remembered the “catch phrase” of the great Russian writer A.P. Chekhov: “Everything in a person should be beautiful: the face, and clothes, and the soul, and thoughts ...”
How can you disagree with this? This expression is closely connected with my ideas of the son of the fatherland.
However, I do not believe that a person is only by nature capable of becoming a patriot. It seems to me that this can be developed in oneself, improving throughout one's life.
The fundamental principle should be, in my opinion, love for the motherland. How can a person call himself a patriot if he hates his homeland? Well, well, he doesn’t hate it, but simply, he is indifferent to her. Yes, he was born here, grew up, and grew old, but this does not mean at all that he has a love for this place. To be honest, it is even very difficult to explain what love for the Fatherland is, as well as the term love in general. Since I don’t have enough life experience yet, I will stop thinking about it and “move” on.
Face. It can also be viewed from several angles. The face as part of the body, and the face as honor, respect and place in society. What does it mean, the face of a patriot should be beautiful? Those. he should be well-groomed and handsome, or maybe his face should be completely symmetrical? Firstly, there are no absolutely symmetrical features, and secondly, in this context, it doesn’t matter if the son of the fatherland is handsome or not, and it doesn’t matter if he is good-looking. It's not about beauty, but about expression, about the message coming from him. And even more importantly, this is not an external characteristic, but the concept of "person" as a person's position in society. This means that the son of the fatherland must represent the best stratum of society (this in no way depends on the financial situation, nobility in society), but have self-respect on the part of people. But this respect should not be bribed, or hypocritically constructed, but true; and this must be earned, but in part it is very difficult to do. Good deeds will help you, because the main thing is not what a person says, but what he does.
Perhaps we will omit the consideration of the concept of “clothes”, because it is not very interesting to me, and, perhaps, it is completely indifferent. Although, of course, one should not forget the proverb: "They meet by their clothes - they see them off by their mind."
Let's go back to the soul. I believe that for the son of the fatherland, she plays one of the important roles. In general, the soul occupies an important place in the life of every person. It is not surprising that psychology studies it. After all, any soul has a huge number of aspects, and it is eternal. Most often, a person tries not to show it, but everything that does not happen to us, no matter what actions we take, no matter what we think about, is all directly related to the state of mind.
What should the soul of a “true man” look like? An unambiguous answer is unlikely to be given, because. I do not have a psychological education, but it seems to me that it should be pure. It should not accumulate negative emotions in relation to other people, life; there is no place for fear either. His soul must be beautiful, it inspires a person, and also, I’m not afraid to repeat myself, it needs the presence of love for the homeland, neighbors, for all creatures on earth, and there must be no self-interest. But, perhaps, there may be pain, pain from the imperfections of people and the homeland itself; desire to help her and be a savior.
And so we come to the "thought". With this, everything is much more complicated. After all, they do not depend on us at all and emerge on their own. We cannot stop the "running of thoughts" even for a second, let alone minutes. This is exactly what we have absolutely no control over.
But still, what thoughts should prevail in the head of a patriot? To be honest, I doubt that even a true patriot will think every day, every minute about the motherland, about love for her, for her compatriots. I think that to think so - means to be mistaken. Because we are all people, and we have a lot of events, experiences, grief and joy, problems and a huge number of “flowers of this bouquet” going on in our lives.
Probably, good intentions should arise in his head, and evil thoughts should be completely absent.
Now, continuing to reflect on my ideas of the son of the fatherland, it seems to me that I should touch on the qualities that he should possess and, perhaps, some character traits.
Again, I will make a reservation that I do not have great scientific knowledge and I can be mistaken in many ways, I ask you to excuse me for this, but nevertheless I express my point of view, which is why I have every reason to write about what I think.
It should represent a man of virtue. Good deeds, reasonable thoughts, striving for improvement, helping people, solidarity, understanding, trying to make this world a better place. And this is not a complete list of what should be present in it.
Do good. Also, “good” is a loose concept. As the saying goes, "do no harm". The son of the fatherland is obliged to treat people kindly, and try to help them in any way he can. Or rather, treat them the way he would like to be treated.
Tolerance. He must be patient with others. After all, each person is individual, and sometimes, one has to endure not very pleasant qualities of even relatives and close people.
Most likely, he should be more of an optimist than a pessimist. Otherwise, what kind of prosperity of the state and motherland can we talk about if all people start thinking pessimistically, and they don’t want to talk about patriotism at all, and even more so they become patriots.
The ability to forgive. This is one of the most remarkable qualities, which, in my opinion, should also belong to the son of the fatherland. After all, almost every person has the right to be forgiven and given another chance; another matter if after that even the person does not change. But that's another conversation. He needs to be able to forgive and mentally let go of this person.
You can talk about good qualities forever, but of course, it’s not a fact that a true patriot will look exactly like that and have such qualities.
But once again I hasten to note that I am creating my own image of the “ideal - the son of the fatherland”, naturally such people have not yet been born in this world.
I would call it a kind of wish, what qualities I would like him to have.
Since we have already considered the good qualities, we will list, perhaps, what we would not like to discover in any case in the son of the fatherland.
Cowardice. He must be brave and ready for exploits for the sake of his homeland. Of course, this should not be taken to the point of absurdity, as in Michel de Cervantes' novel Don Quixote.
Deception, hypocrisy. They should not be inherent not only to the son of the fatherland, but also to a person in general.
Pessimism - I have already spoken about it. It is necessary to believe in your own strength, in a better future and peace in the world.
Hatred. It is impossible to be a patriot by hating people and the world in general.
Racism. The son of the fatherland must treat equally well all the peoples living on the territory of his fatherland. There is no better or worse people.
Treason. The most terrible vice. A traitor to his homeland can by no means be called a patriot.
Violation of laws. The laws of the state must be respected. Most importantly, keep the laws of God.
This is a small list of what should not be included in the concept of such a person as "son of the fatherland."
Having examined the son of the fatherland from my point of view, I would now like to turn directly to the main topic of this essay, namely: “Does patriotism exist today?”
And again, depending on what we mean by this word.
For me patriotism- this is love for the motherland, serving one's homeland; lies in the ability to preserve values and, most likely, in the ability to make sacrifices for the well-being of one's fatherland.
To be honest, this question put me a little in a stupor. If I were asked if there was patriotism in our country during the Great Patriotic War, I would answer without hesitation - yes!
Until now, the devotion of these people who are ready to go to death for the sake of their homeland delights ...
Pride for them, as well as tears, pity and regret that it was not sweet for them, they won for us, for the sake of a peaceful sky above our heads! And we will never be able to thank them for the fact that we now live in freedom and peace. What a pity that my current peers sometimes do not think about it, and victory in the Second World War is just a formality for them, and what remains in the history of the last century ...
What can I say about today's life, about youth and patriotism?
I believe that it is simply impossible to give a definite answer here.
Suppose I say that patriotism is now there. But is it? And if there is, is it to such an exalted degree as it was before?
Still, I would like to believe that patriotism has been preserved in our country (we will not consider other countries), but it is definitely not so pronounced.
Of course, our government has repeatedly said at various speeches, conferences and so on that it is necessary to develop patriotic qualities in today's youth.
But really look at it. Is it visible in the cheerful guys standing with cans of beer and smoking, at least a drop of patriotism? I doubt that in the “mighty Russian language” they speak about grandfathers and great-grandfathers and about the son of the fatherland ... Or how they “excuse themselves” from the army (unfortunately, you can’t say otherwise), buy military tickets, and do not want to serve, defend their homeland …
Is it possible to call it such a loud word as patriotism?
Either I don’t understand at all what this concept means, or in fact, patriotism is practically absent (however, it is so painted in theory).
Naturally, I cannot say that all my peers are just like that, and that we all (including myself) do not understand anything about patriotism and do not think about it. Simply, the above-described young people, unfortunately, become more and more every year (it’s even scary to think what will happen next).
In addition, patriotism still remained in those people who defended us, more precisely, in those who survived after the Second World War.
Probably, he is present in the hearts of those who go to serve in the army, go to the navy and perform military tasks. In those who have love in their homeland, and they are ready to defend it.
It is possible that patriotic feelings may arise quite imperceptibly.
At this moment, you understand that you are proud of your homeland, you understand that you yearn for it, and you can’t find a better homeland.
But, nevertheless, if you face the truth, and from pleasant dreams to return to the real world, it becomes a little sad, and maybe a lot.
After all, reality is harsher than we try to see it.
To be honest, sometimes, thinking about the fact that if suddenly a war breaks out (God forbid), who will go to defend us? Will patriotic feelings arise in people and will they be ready to sacrifice themselves and their lives for the sake of their homeland, for the sake of the fatherland?
I'm sorry, but I can't give a positive answer. Maybe most people will scatter in all directions, get scared, hide somewhere, and will tremble together and wait for death?
Or, on the contrary, will all this unite their spirit, and a strong, friendly, powerful state will rise?
Nobody knows, and only time will tell. But still I want to believe in the best.
Summing up, I understand that it is impossible to say unambiguously about patriotism now. Especially for me, a second-year student who has so far little life experience. Such a topic needs to be developed by several people, and preferably with certain knowledge in this matter.
I thought about one more question. Do I consider myself a patriot?
And again, ambiguous thoughts swirled in my head.
If we consider from the point of view of all those good qualities that I described at the beginning of the essay, then according to some criteria I do not fit.
In addition, after analyzing the current youth, to which I also belong to some extent, I am also not very suitable for being called a “son of the fatherland”.
However, if you look at the love for the motherland - yes, I love my motherland, but at the same time I am not always satisfied with what is happening in the state, in my fatherland.
And sometimes I am completely oppressed by the situation in our country, social inequality, an incredible number of crimes, oppression, misunderstanding of views and much, much more ...
Although if I lived during the Second World War, I would still stand up for the defense of the fatherland, my relatives and friends, and just people in general.
So who am I, a patriot or not? This question is likely to remain rhetorical.
In conclusion, I would like to add that it was not easy for me to include Pushkin's epigraph at the beginning of the essay. He, like no one else, knew how to write about his homeland, and was a true patriot.
I came to the conclusion that the topic that A.N. Radishchev, is relevant in our time. But, as I said, it is impossible to consider this topic from one side and superficially. It takes years to study this issue.
And, perhaps, with each century, this problem will be studied in a new way, already with other aspects, other people.
